Steve Jobs achieved hero status a few months ago for calling on record labels to remove copy restrictions from downloads. It is a stance that is hugely popular with the media, in the tech community and with consumers. If actions speak louder than words then Jobs and the company that he leads are sending a very different message.

After some delay, iTunes has added DRM free tracks from EMI, but if Steve Jobs truly cared about consumer choice and freedom:

Why is iTunes tagging the purchaser's name and email address onto every download?

Why is Jobs effectively forcing consumers to choose what kind of tracks they want to purchase in advance instead of offering more expensive DRM free tracks alongside cheaper tracks with DRM?

Why isn't Jobs following Amazon's lead and using his considerable clout to encourage labels to remove copy protection?

Why aren't millions of tracks from indie labels offered DRM free elsewhere for sale on iTunes? We know he's been saying differently of late, but the fact is that iTunes has yet to even set a timetable for removing copy-protection from more tracks.

Or Does Jobs secretly prefer DRM? Is the real truth that he has nothing to gain and much to loose if record labels remove copy protection? After all, untethered downloads purchased from other store are playable on the iPod opening the previously closed iTunes/IPod ecosystem.

Comments

Does Steve Jobs Secretly Prefer DRM?

Steve Jobs achieved hero status a few months ago for calling on record labels to remove copy restrictions from downloads. It is a stance that is hugely popular with the media, in the tech community and with consumers. If actions speak louder than words then Jobs and the company that he leads are sending a very different message.

After some delay, iTunes has added DRM free tracks from EMI, but if Steve Jobs truly cared about consumer choice and freedom:

Why is iTunes tagging the purchaser's name and email address onto every download?

Why is Jobs effectively forcing consumers to choose what kind of tracks they want to purchase in advance instead of offering more expensive DRM free tracks alongside cheaper tracks with DRM?

Why isn't Jobs following Amazon's lead and using his considerable clout to encourage labels to remove copy protection?

Why aren't millions of tracks from indie labels offered DRM free elsewhere for sale on iTunes? We know he's been saying differently of late, but the fact is that iTunes has yet to even set a timetable for removing copy-protection from more tracks.

Or Does Jobs secretly prefer DRM? Is the real truth that he has nothing to gain and much to loose if record labels remove copy protection? After all, untethered downloads purchased from other store are playable on the iPod opening the previously closed iTunes/IPod ecosystem.